Trump asks Supreme Court to halt subpoena for his tax returns

[Elderberry]

American Military News by  Kyle Perisic 11/14/2019

President Donald Trump and his team have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday to block a subpoena for his tax returns, saying that it would distract him from numerous and important duties as president.

The subpoena from the Manhattan-based federal court Judge Victor Marrero seeks Trump’s tax returns since 2011 from his accounting firm, the Associated Press reported.

Trump is not legally obligated to release his tax returns, and his opponents have criticized him for it because most presidents have done so since Gerald Ford began the informal tradition in 1974.

A criminal probe of the president, Trump’s lawyers argue, even at the state or local level, is unconstitutional and unprecedented in U.S. history.

More: https://americanmilitarynews.com/2019/11/trump-asks-supreme-court-to-halt-subpoena-for-his-tax-returns/

[Elderberry]

President Trump’s taxes reach the Supreme Court

SCOTUSblog by Steve Vladeck 11/15/2019

https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/11/president-trumps-taxes-reach-the-supreme-court/#more-290277

Late Thursday afternoon, the first case arising out of a subpoena dispute involving President Donald Trump reached the Supreme Court when the president’s personal lawyers filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in Trump v. Vance. But whereas the Vance case raises interesting questions about when the president can be sued in state court, it is likely to be overtaken in importance by other subpoena disputes making their way to the court—including the dispute over the House Oversight Committee’s subpoena to the Mazars accounting firm, in which the D.C. Circuit denied rehearing en banc on Wednesday, and in which a stay application may be filed with Chief Justice John Roberts as early as today.

The proceedings below

The Vance case arises out of a subpoena issued by New York County (Manhattan) District Attorney Cyrus Vance to Mazars for financial records as part of an ongoing state grand-jury proceeding that, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit explained, “is investigating whether several individuals and entities have committed criminal violations of New York law.” As part of that investigation, Vance served a subpoena on Mazars in late August 2019 for “a wide variety of financial records dating from January 1, 2011 to the present and relating to the President, the Trump Organization, and several related entities.” That includes any “[t]ax returns and related schedules, in draft, as-filed, and amended form” within Mazars’ possession.

On September 19, Trump filed suit in federal district court in New York seeking to bar Mazars from complying with the subpoena. At the heart of the complaint are two related arguments: that, because the president cannot be criminally indicted while in office, he is absolutely immune from criminal process during the same time period; and that, at the very least, the supremacy clause of the Constitution bars state courts from issuing such process.

More at link.

[Smokin Joe]

In all fairness....What ever happened to Executive Privilege? (And where are the previous POTUS' school records, etc...)

[Bigun]

In all fairness....What ever happened to Executive Privilege? (And where are the previous POTUS' school records, etc...)

    

[Elderberry]

Howe on the Court 11/15/2019

http://amylhowe.com/2019/11/15/trump-returns-to-supreme-court-asks-justices-to-intervene-in-dispute-over-financial-records/

Trump returns to Supreme Court, asks justices to intervene in dispute over financial records

Yesterday lawyers for President Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court to review a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ordering the president to provide New York prosecutors with his tax returns. Those lawyers were back at the court today, this time asking the justices to temporarily put on hold a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that upheld a subpoena for Trump’s financial records issued by House Democrats to Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars.

The subpoena at the center of the dispute came from the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, which wants the financial records as part of its investigation into the adequacy of current government ethics laws. The president filed this lawsuit to bar Mazars from turning over the documents, arguing that the subpoena goes beyond Congress’ authority because it does not serve a legitimate legislative purpose.

A federal trial court rejected this contention, and in October a divided three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit upheld that ruling. The court of appeals concluded that the “public record reveals legitimate legislative pursuits,” rather than “an impermissible law-enforcement purpose behind the Committee’s subpoena,” and that the committee is investigating a subject on which it could enact legislation.

Arguing that “everything about this case is unprecedented,” Trump today asked the Supreme Court to block the D.C. Circuit’s ruling from going into effect on November 20 to give his lawyers time to file a petition for review of the lower court’s decision. If the D.C. Circuit’s ruling is allowed to stand, Trump complained in his 32-page filing today, “any committee of Congress can subpoena any personal information from the President; all the committee needs to say is that it’s considering legislation that would force Presidents to disclose that same information. Given the temptation to dig up dirt on political rivals, intrusive subpoenas into personal lives of Presidents will become our new normal in terms of divided government—no matter which party is in power. If every committee chairman is going to have this unbounded authority, this Court should be the one to say so.”

More at link.

[mystery-ak]

There’s A Big Fight Brewing In The Supreme Court Over Trump’s Financial Records And Presidential Immunity
https://dailycaller.com/2019/11/15/supreme-court-trump-records/

[Smokin Joe]

There’s A Big Fight Brewing In The Supreme Court Over Trump’s Financial Records And Presidential Immunity
https://dailycaller.com/2019/11/15/supreme-court-trump-records/

From the link:

“This subpoena is a valid exercise of the legislative oversight authority because it seeks information important to determining the fitness of legislation to address potential problems within the executive branch and the electoral system,” Judge David Tatel wrote for the three-judge panel. Judge Neomi Rao dissented from Tatel’s decision.

Translation: We think we might find something that we might be able to incorporate in a law we might propose.

That's a lot of "maybe", not anything which has been proposed, not pending legislation, and not the investigation of anything with real probable cause. It's just another fishing expedition.

Put up a sign on the DNC: "Gone Fishing"

That summarizes the last three years of Democrat activity in local, State, and Federal agencies, when they easliy enough could have been pursuing real crimes which have been documented in the statements of unindicted conspirators and perpetrators in the previous administration.

[XenaLee]

The USSC should weigh in on this issue.   If the rats are able to force exposure (yes, they will leak anything they find that they "think" they can use against him) of a US citizen's tax returns.... the US Constitution will have been rendered "moot".   And I've read that Ginsburg is under the weather (stomach bug???) right now, so now would be the perfect time for that ruling.  We either have a nation based on the rule of law set forth in the Constitution....

or we don't.

If we don't, we need to know.  Now, rather than later.  Much preparation to do......

[truth_seeker]

California has a body of laws, pertaining to real estate, agency etc.

I learned once, that similar laws to not pertain to insurance agents.

No idea about other states, financial fiduciaries lawyers, etc.

But generally a principal uses another as an "agent."

The idea of going to the tax preparer, is beyond the pale.

The constitution does NOT prescribe taxes-disclosures?

FDR and JFK were wealthy. Did they reveal their personal financial details?

[Smokin Joe]

California has a body of laws, pertaining to real estate, agency etc.

I learned once, that similar laws to not pertain to insurance agents.

No idea about other states, financial fiduciaries lawyers, etc.

But generally a principal uses another as an "agent."

The idea of going to the tax preparer, is beyond the pale.

The constitution does NOT prescribe taxes-disclosures?

FDR and JFK were wealthy. Did they reveal their personal financial details?

How about that poor ghetto kid from Hawaii who is a multimillionaire now on a six figure salary for eight years? There are lots of meatier things to investigate, from people who commanded ridiculous "speaking fees" while they were in office.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

How about that poor ghetto kid from Hawaii who is a multimillionaire now on a six figure salary for eight years? There are lots of meatier things to investigate, from people who commanded ridiculous "speaking fees" while they were in office.

Yeah, but he made his money selling books.

Pretty good at it, too, because I've known authors who actually sold real books (as in, I've seen people reading them) and they didn't make jack.

[truth_seeker]

How about that poor ghetto kid from Hawaii who is a multimillionaire now on a six figure salary for eight years? There are lots of meatier things to investigate, from people who commanded ridiculous "speaking fees" while they were in office.

So are you saaying Trump should turn over his returns, because Obama enriched himself from holding office?

Generally holding very high office, attracts wealth opportunities, and helpfull (often wealthy) friends. Some of which are lawyers.

[Smokin Joe]

So are you saaying Trump should turn over his returns, because Obama enriched himself from holding office?

Generally holding very high office, attracts wealth opportunities, and helpfull (often wealthy) friends. Some of which are lawyers.

No, I am not saying that. I am saying enough of the double standard.

Invoke Executive privilege and let them challenge that if they dare.

[FeelNoPain]

Yeah, but he made his money selling books.

Pretty good at it, too, because I've known authors who actually sold real books (as in, I've seen people reading them) and they didn't make jack.

Even if he prevails in the Supreme Court, how does POTUS survive:
  1. the Dems asking 1000x a day in ads in the runup to the election, [ominous, chilling voice] "What is the Trump hiding?" "Is it money laundering? Russian mob ties? Areas where he is susceptible to blackmail? The American people have a right to know!"
   2. Trump being challenged directly in a presidential debate with his own promise that he would release them if he was elected?

   To me, (and I'm sure to many others) it was a boss move in 2016 that he was "sticking it to the man" by not releasing his taxes, but now it's like,"WTF, dude--all the way to the Supreme Court?" What could be that bad?